Comparing the effects of GM and non‐GM soybean varieties on non‐target arthropods

2020 ◽  
Vol 50 (9) ◽  
pp. 423-432
Author(s):  
Md Ruhul Amin ◽  
Sung‐Dug Oh ◽  
Sang Jae Suh
Keyword(s):  
Gm Soybean

scholarly journals Effect of a Diet Composed of Genetically Modified Feed Components on the Selected Immune Parameters in Pigs, Cattle, and Poultry

2013 ◽  
Vol 57 (2) ◽  
pp. 209-217 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dariusz Bednarek ◽  
Katarzyna Dudek ◽  
Krzysztof Kwiatek ◽  
Małgorzata Świątkiewicz ◽  
Sylwester Świątkiewicz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Soybean Meal ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
Group Iv ◽  
Group Vi ◽  
Group V ◽  
Group Iii ◽  
Immune Parameters ◽  
Group I ◽  
Toxin Protein ◽  
Gm Soybean

Abstract The aim of the study was to evaluate the immune effects of genetically modified (GM), insect resistant corn (MON810) expressing toxin protein of Bacillus thuringiensis, and glyphosate-tolerant soybean meal (Roundup Ready MON-40-30-2), which are used as the feed mixture components in domestic animals. The study was conducted on 60 pigs (36 fatteners and 24 sows), 20 calves, 40 broilers, and 40 laying hens. Each species was divided into four basic nutritional groups: group I (control) - conventional feed, group II - feed consisted of GM soybean meal and non-modified corn, group III - non-modified soybean meal and GM corn, group IV - GM soybean meal and GM corn. Moreover, in the experiment on fatteners two additional groups were formed: group V - animals fed both conventional soybean meal and bruised grain, and group VI - GM soybean meal and conventional bruised grain. The results of study did not reveal any significant effect of feed mixtures containing GM components on the immune response in all animals regardless of their species and technological producing groups.

Performance of Genetically Modified Soybean Expressing the Cry1A.105, Cry2Ab2, and Cry1Ac Proteins Against Key Lepidopteran Pests in Brazil

2020 ◽  
Vol 113 (6) ◽  
pp. 2883-2889
Author(s):  
Fabiana B Bacalhau ◽  
Patrick M Dourado ◽  
Renato J Horikoshi ◽  
Renato A Carvalho ◽  
Altair Semeão ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Genetically Modified ◽  
Leaf Disc ◽  
Field Studies ◽  
Field Conditions ◽  
Anticarsia Gemmatalis ◽  
Genetically Modified Soybean ◽  
Lepidopteran Pests ◽  
Highly Effective ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Gm Soybean

Abstract The pyramided genetically modified (GM) soybean [Glycine max L. (Merr.)] MON87751 × MON87708 × MON87701 × MON89788, expressing Cry1A.105, Cry2Ab2, and Cry1Ac from Bacillus thuringiensis Berliner, was approved for commercial use in Brazil. We conducted laboratory, greenhouse, and field studies to assess the efficacy of this Bt soybean against key soybean lepidopteran pests. Neonates of Anticarsia gemmatalis (Hübner) (Lepidoptera: Erebidae), Chrysodeixis includens (Walker), and Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) were exposed to Bt proteins in diet-overlay bioassays. MON87751 × MON87708 × MON87701 × MON89788 soybean and individual components were evaluated in laboratory (leaf disc), greenhouse (high artificial infestations), and in field conditions (natural infestations). Neonates of A. gemmatalis, C. includens, and H. armigera were highly susceptible to Cry1A.105 (LC50 from 0.79 to 48.22 ng/cm2), Cry2Ab2 (LC50 from 1.24 to 8.36 ng/cm2), and Cry1Ac (LC50 from 0.15 to 5.07 ng/cm2) in diet-overlay bioassays. In laboratory leaf disc bioassays and greenhouse trials, MON87751 × MON87708 × MON87701 × MON89788 soybean as well as the individual components were highly effective in controlling A. gemmatalis, C. includens, and H. armigera. Similarly, under field conditions, the pyramided genotypes expressing Cry1A.105, Cry2Ab2, and Cry1Ac were highly effective at protecting soybean against C. includens. We concluded that the individual Bt proteins expressed by GM soybean MON87751 × MON87708 × MON87701 × MON89788 killed all or nearly all the susceptible A. gemmatalis, C. includens, and H. armigera, fulfilling one important criterion for successfully delaying resistance to pyramided Bt crops.

First comprehensive GMOs testing in Lebanon: Screening, identification and quantification of GM soybean imports

Food Control ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 146-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joyce Sakr ◽  
Narmeen Mallah ◽  
Lamis Chalak ◽  
Gretta Abou-Sleymane
Keyword(s):  
Gm Soybean ◽  
Identification And Quantification

Erratum to “Benchmarking the sustainability performance of the Brazilian non-GM and GM soybean meal chains: An indicator-based approach” [Food Policy (55) (2015) 22–32]

Food Policy ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 56 ◽  
pp. 114
Author(s):  
Daniel Gaitán-Cremaschi ◽  
Farahnaz Pashaei Kamali ◽  
Frits K. van Evert ◽  
Miranda P.M. Meuwissen ◽  
Alfons G.J.M. Oude Lansink
Keyword(s):  
Soybean Meal ◽  
Food Policy ◽  
Sustainability Performance ◽  
Gm Soybean

scholarly journals Effect of Genetically Modified Feeds on Physico-Chemical Properties of Pork

2011 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 597-606 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna Stadnik ◽  
Małgorzata Karwowska ◽  
Zbigniew Dolatowski ◽  
Małgorzata Świątkiewicz ◽  
Krzysztof Kwiatek
Keyword(s):  
Soybean Meal ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
Chemical Properties ◽  
Neck Muscles ◽  
Transgenic Maize ◽  
Gm Maize ◽  
Group I ◽  
Physico Chemical ◽  
Group Ii ◽  
Gm Soybean

Effect of Genetically Modified Feeds on Physico-Chemical Properties of PorkThe objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of genetically modified (GM), insect-resistant Bt maize (MON810) and the meal made of glyphosate-tolerant soybean (Roundup Ready MON40-3-2) used as the dietary components for pigs on the physico-chemical properties of meat. Forty-eight fatteners derived from Polish Landrace x Polish Large White sows mated to a Duroc x Pietrain boar were used. All animals received isonitrogenous and isoenergetic diets containing or not containing the genetically modified components. The design of the experiment was as follows: group I (control) - non-modified soybean meal and maize; group II - GM soybean meal and non-modified maize; group III - non-modified soybean meal and GM maize; group IV - GM soybean meal and GM maize. The examination of the pH values of loin and neck muscles indicated no statistically significant differences between pigs fed diets containing non-transgenic or transgenic feeds. No statistical differences were observed for water holding capacity (WHC) within dietary treatments. The introduction of transgenic maize and soybean meal into pig diets did not significantly affect the a* colour parameter of loin as well as neck muscles. The use of transgenic maize or soybean meal did not cause significant changes in the L* colour value of loin. Results obtained for neck muscles were more differentiated, possibly due to the natural heterogeneity of this primal cut. Pigs which had consumed the transgenic diet exhibited slightly decreased lipid stability of loin, as indicated by thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS). The decrease was statistically significant only in the case of muscles from group II. The addition of feeds derived from genetically modified crops into pig diets did not significantly affect the stability of neck muscle lipids; however, TBARS values of these muscles were twice those of loin muscles.

Detection of GM soybean in food products by simultaneous employment of three pairs of PCR primers

2009 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
pp. 349-352 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zorica Nikolić ◽  
Ksenija Taški-Ajduković ◽  
Aranka Jevtić ◽  
Dragana Marinković
Keyword(s):  
Food Products ◽  
Pcr Primers ◽  
Gm Soybean

Populism Curtailed? Globalization and the Debate over Genetically Modified Organisms in the European Union

Populism ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 157-183
Author(s):  
Shane Markowitz
Keyword(s):  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Plant Biotechnology ◽  
Policy Outcomes ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Environmental Groups ◽  
Regulatory Decisions ◽  
Global Food ◽  
Gm Soybean ◽  
The Eu

Abstract While the role of globalization in constituting the rise of populist movements has been increasingly recognized, the ways in which globalization can, in fact, curtail populism is also worthy of analytical attention. This is exemplified in the EU debate over plant biotechnology where a couple of exceptions to the largely anticorporate populist mobilization against transgenic crops include the political positioning of EU farmers in favor of GM soybean imports and the posturing of environmental groups and beekeepers against the labeling of GM contaminated honey. Interrogating these cases, the paper attributes mobilization/policy outcomes to the ways in which global food-consumption patterns, supermarket branding initiatives, and regulatory decisions intermingled with the sociomaterial dynamics of particular locales to constitute decision-making landscapes that made populist policies (un)fathomable. In engaging with the globalism-populism nexus in this manner, the paper imparts lessons on how globalization and the populist outcomes associated with it can be honed and reoriented.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document